Objective: To evaluate psychometrics of wearable devices measuring physical activity (PA) in ambulant children with gait abnormalities due to neuromuscular conditions. Data Sources: We searched PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus in March 2023. Study Selection: We included studies if (1) participants were ambulatory children (2-19y) with gait abnormalities, (2) reliability and validity were analyzed, and (3) peer-reviewed studies in the English language and full-text were available. We excluded studies of children with primarily visual conditions, behavioral diagnoses, or primarily cognitive disability. We performed independent screening and inclusion, data extraction, assessment of the data, and grading of results with 2 researchers. Data Extraction: Our report follows Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We assessed methodological quality with Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health measurement instruments. We extracted data on reported reliability, measurement error, and validity. We performed meta-analyses for reliability and validity coefficient values. Data Synthesis: Of 6911 studies, we included 26 with 1064 participants for meta-analysis. Results showed that wearables measuring PA in children with abnormal gait have high to very high reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]+, test-retest reliability=0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.89; I2=88.57%; ICC+, interdevice reliability=0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-0.99; I2=71.01%) and moderate to high validity in a standardized setting (r+, construct validity=0.63; 95% CI, 0.36-0.89; I2=99.97%; r+, criterion validity=0.68; 95% CI, 0.57-0.79; I2=98.70%; r+, criterion validity cutoff point based=0.69; 95% CI, 0.58-0.80; I2=87.02%). The methodological quality of all studies included in the meta-analysis was moderate. Conclusions: There was high to very high reliability and moderate to high validity for wearables measuring PA in children with abnormal gait, primarily due to neurological conditions. Clinicians should be aware that several moderating factors can influence an assessment.
AbstractObjective: Many older individuals receive rehabilitation in an out-of-hospital setting (OOHS) after acute hospitalization; however, its effect onmobility and unplanned hospital readmission is unclear. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on this topic.Data Sources: Medline OVID, Embase OVID, and CINAHL were searched from their inception until February 22, 2018.Study Selection: OOHS (ie, skilled nursing facilities, outpatient clinics, or community-based at home) randomized trials studying the effect ofmultidisciplinary rehabilitation were selected, including those assessing exercise in older patients (mean age 65y) after discharge from hospitalafter an acute illness.Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently selected the studies, performed independent data extraction, and assessed the risk of bias.Outcomes were pooled using fixed- or random-effect models as appropriate. The main outcomes were mobility at and unplanned hospitalreadmission within 3 months of discharge.Data Synthesis: A total of 15 studies (1255 patients) were included in the systematic review and 12 were included in the meta-analysis (7assessing mobility using the 6-minute walk distance [6MWD] test and 7 assessing unplanned hospital readmission). Based on the 6MWD, patientsreceiving rehabilitation walked an average of 23 m more than controls (95% confidence interval [CI]Z: 1.34 to 48.32; I2: 51%). Rehabilitationdid not lower the 3-month risk of unplanned hospital readmission (risk ratio: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.73-1.19; I2: 34%). The risk of bias was present,mainly due to the nonblinded outcome assessment in 3 studies, and 7 studies scored this unclearly.Conclusion: OOHS-based multidisciplinary rehabilitation leads to improved mobility in older patients 3 months after they are discharged fromhospital following an acute illness and is not associated with a lower risk of unplanned hospital readmission within 3 months of discharge.However, the wide 95% CIs indicate that the evidence is not robust.
Objective To systematically summarize the literature on the course of pain in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), prognostic factors that predict deterioration of pain, the course of physical functioning, and prognostic factors that predict deterioration of physical functioning in persons with knee OA. Methods A search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Psych‐INFO, and SPORTDiscus up to January 2014. A meta‐analysis and a qualitative data synthesis were performed. Results Of the 58 studies included, 39 were of high quality. High heterogeneity across studies (I2 >90%) and within study populations (reflected by large SDs of change scores) was found. Therefore, the course of pain and physical functioning was interpreted to be indistinct. We found strong evidence for a number of prognostic factors predicting deterioration in pain (e.g., higher knee pain at baseline, bilateral knee symptoms, and depressive symptoms). We also found strong evidence for a number of prognostic factors predicting deterioration in physical functioning (e.g., worsening in radiographic OA, worsening of knee pain, lower knee extension muscle strength, lower walking speed, and higher comorbidity count). Conclusion Because of high heterogeneity across studies and within study populations, no conclusions can be drawn with regard to the course of pain and physical functioning. These findings support current research efforts to define subgroups or phenotypes within knee OA populations. Strong evidence was found for knee characteristics, clinical factors, and psychosocial factors as prognostics of deterioration of pain and physical functioning.
